A 30-Year Development

By Eric F. Greenberg, Attorney-at-law

As of 2019, it’s been 30 years since I began writing columns about legal and regulatory developments for the packaging industry. That first column was about time-temperature indicators on food packages and fresh-prepared refrigerated foods. The experience of writing these columns has been enjoyable and rewarding. I owe a great debt of gratitude to all of the loyal readers, expert industry and government information sources, and talented editors who have helped me along the way. Thank you all.

I would comment that marking this anniversary makes me feel old, but the truth is, nowadays pretty much everything makes me feel old.

It’s also true, though, that right now the realm of legal and regulatory developments affecting packaging is more dynamic and changeable than it has been during long stretches of those 30 years. After all, it hasn’t always been the case that…

trace amounts of chemicals in substances used to make packaging have captured the attention of the public and some lawmakers, or that
consumers are demanding “clean label” foods, as well as a brave new world of non-meat-containing meat alternative products that’s catching on quickly, or that
some NGOs are advocating against permitting companies to independently conclude that their uses of substances in food are Generally Recognized As Safe, or that
poor waste handling practices in some parts of the world have inspired anti-plastics business practices and laws, or that
new packaging technologies with nanomaterials and active and intelligent features seem to emerge regularly, or that
the U.S. government’s administration is ideologically opposed to the creation of any new regulations on essentially any topic, even those relating to safety, or that
food and dietary supplement label claims of the products’ various health effects, or that they are ‘natural’ or have other characteristics, are being challenged in civil class actions, or that
the nation is undergoing a convulsive revolution in the legality of cannabis- and CBD-containing products, pressuring packagers to stay on top of structural and labeling requirements.

All of those developments, and more, are part of the current scene. Lucky for your humble columnist, they can be expected to remain important sources of new developments and information for readers for the foreseeable future, as well. PW

Eric Greenberg can be reached at [email protected] Or visit his firm’s Web site atwww.ericfgreenbergpc.com.

This article is informational only and is not intended as, and should not be considered to be, legal advice..

Be sure to check for any updated information about the topics discussed in this article..

Our firm is a proud member of the International Network of Boutique Law Firms, a select organization with member law firms throughout the United States and “strategic partners” around the world.

International Network of Boutique and Independent Law Firms badge

GRAS Goes to Congress

By Eric F. Greenberg, Attorney-at-law

Remember that whole business involving NGOs and other folks objecting to the legal system that allows companies to self-determine that their uses of substances are Generally Recognized As Safe (“GRAS”)? And remember how some groups had gone to court to get the system declared unlawful, but late last year the court ruled against them? Well, there’s a new chapter to this story. Now, some members of Congress have proposed a bill that would make changes to the law to address those very same objections.

The GRAS pathway to clearance of the use of substances in packaging and in food is crucially important, and this proposed law has the potential to make enormous changes in various legal obligations. For that reason, packagers should keep a close eye on this latest chapter in the ongoing debate over the policy issues surrounding the GRAS system.

In my view, addressing the complaints we’ve heard for years about the GRAS program required changes in the law, so at least the objectors are in the correct forum. There’s been so much criticism of the Food and Drug Administration lately, what with its slow reaction to the infant formula contamination problem, on top of its handling of issues relating to heavy metals in baby food and various complaints about its handling of COVID and other drug approvals, for some examples. But when it comes to the GRAS program, it’s always seemed that most of the objectors’ objections were better directed at Congress than at FDA.

You have questions, We have answers. Request a consult.

Our Office Location

303 East Wacker Drive Suite 305
Chicago, IL 60601
Phone: 312-977-4647

Chicago Law Office